Crap Throwing Monkey

Calling illegal immigrants terrorists is racist. Better off not calling them anything when you shoot them.

So you think people understand that shooting at other people is "bad"...but isn't bad if you shoot at them and call them "wetbacks"? You're an idiot.

Sure. It's not racist to shoot 'em, just to call them wetbacks when you do, because it shows no respect them and basically treats them as subhuman as you're blowing them the !@#$ away...

Well...that's okay. Just make sure when you shoot, you shout "Take that, you !@#$ing potential Hispanic-American!", not "Take that, you !@#$ing breeder!"

Joe, Joe, Joe...you just don't get it. Illegal immigration isn't a crime. Calling illegal immigrants "wetbacks" and "Mexican nationalists" is.

Oh. My apologies. You mentioned violence once. And harped for two pages on how wrong it was to call them "wetbacks". Spin it however you like, anyone who looks at a game that involves shooting people and bitches about how horrible it is that said targets would be racially stereotyped is severely !@#$ed in the head. I mean, how do you look at a mother and two children being shot - even in a game - and say "Dammit, that's not right! They called her a breeder!"

Antowain Smith's with the Bucs, too?

How DARE you stereotype them! You can shoot them, but don't DARE stereotype them!

It says a lot about you that you're more upset about racially stereotyping Mexicans in a game than you are shooting them.

!@#$ing sand !@#$s.

There's other blogs. LA's for example, which, though full of sappy, syrupy parental stuff, is also funny as hell...

I just managed to see the highlights from last night's game (I was so busy trying to set up the other TV - wife had the one working one claimed for 24 - that I forgot about the friggin' game. ) Confirm or deny: it looked to me like Miller was goaltending more aggressively than usual. Yes? No? Looked like it worked for him, too. And the Sabres look virtually unstoppable on odd-man breaks the past few games. I'd love to see their scoring percentage overall on such...

I didn't say it didn't exist, I said it had been cured. Last I checked, those were two completely different concepts. And again, if you're going to equate the two, discussion is pointless, since then by definition nothing has ever been "cured". Of course, a big part of it too is how you want to look at it, from the perspective of the illness or the microbe, which again are two different things...and I submit that the idea of "cured" only applies to the illness. How do you "cure" a microbe?

This must be some interesting definition of "cured" I've never heard before. What DO you call it when an infectious disease infects no one and exists only in test tubes? "Remission"? Since when is a disease not cured even when said illness no longer exists??? And we were having such a nice, civil discussion up to that point...but then you had to go and get all retarded with this bull sh--...

I love having SME's on the board. Both of 'em.

Uhhhh...ever hear of smallpox? About 30 years ago? Where'd you go to school that you never heard about this, Papua New Guniea U?

Again, there are a handful of anti-virals that are analogous to antibiotics. I know of one that's effective against Arenaviridae (ribavarin, I believe), and of course there's a handful that are effective against HIV. And then there's Pleconaril...which blocks sites on the surface coats of rhinoviruses and thus inhibits their penetration of cell walls. In other words: it's an answer for the common cold. Thanks for playing.

I'll bet, though, that if they pulled credit card records from the transactions and billed the cards the difference, the credit card companies would not only let them but wouldn't let the credit card holders challenge the charges.

Ed's dead, baby. Ed's dead...

I second that for every game I've seen (not nearly as many as I'd like). I've seen him give up very few goals that weren't attributable to some atrocious defensive breakdown.

One. A couple. It depends on the virus though. Of course, antibiotics don't necessarily work on bacteria anymore. That has something to do with this little theory called evolution...

...because it involves immigrants from Mexico. Who just happen to be Mexican. Who else is going to come over the Mexican border? !@#$ing Lithuanians? You're basically saying it's racist to say there's Mexicans in Mexico...

Actually, theories are never facts. A theory is just a way of explaining the observable universe; what separates a good theory from a bad one is the degree to which it explains observation and to which it predicts future behavior or the as-yet unobserved. It's why the theory of Van der Waals forces explains geckos better than the one-legged spherical gecko model: both may explain why geckos stick to walls...but one of the theories doesn't allow geckos the ability to walk, which they clearly do. But theories ain't fact, regardless. A very good theory can "act" like a fact, but it still isn't one. And evolution is, in fact, a very good theory - it explains and predicts a lot that can't otherwise be explained or predicted. The Big Bang - basically, relativity - on the other hand...it sucks. Too many holes, not enough explanation, especially in light of the past seven years. MOND (look it up) actually does a much better job of explaining the observable universe.

Uhhhh...okay. Maybe it's time to get a new girlfriend? I'm just sayin'...

Actually, you're right. It's an article of faith with me that sometimes sh-- just happens. It just happens to let me sleep at night; otherwise I'd stay awake wondering "Why's my father in the hospital dying right now?" or "Why does chicken taste like chicken?" Though again...if you REALLY want me to explain why sh-- just happenes...I'll say "Lagrangian theory."